Democratic Sentinel, Volume 12, Number 15, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 May 1888 — CONGRESSIONAL. [ARTICLE]

CONGRESSIONAL.

Work of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Mb. Voorhees occupied the floor of the Senate on April 25, and spoke at length in reply to the recent speech of Mr. Ingalls. Mr. Voorhees began by declaring that the Republican, party leaders, driven by madness to suicide and hari-kari, were going before the American people opposing every reduction of taxes except those paid by tobacco and alcoholic spirits, and concluded by saying that the verdict, of the American people in November would no that there had been honest, capable government, and that it must continue. The House adopted a resolution from the Ways and Means Committee limiting the general debate on the tariff bill to seventeen days, with two evening sessions weekly, the time to be equally divided between the two parties. The debate waathen opened by Mr. Bynum, of Indiana, who said ha believed that customs duties should be levied to meet the current, ordinary expenses of the Government, and that any extraordinary expenses should be met by a resort to internal taxes. The great trouble with the country was the want of a market. Tear down the wall that had been built around the coast, give American labor a chance to compete with foreign labor, and it could take care of itself. It needed noother protection. Mr. Browne of Indiana expressed himself as not in the least frightened at the plethoric condition of the NationalTreasury. The accumulating revenue might be used for the people's benefit. The national debt might be gradually paid off, the merchant marine might be built up, harbor and coast defenses might be constructed, a navy might be provided, and a grateful people might tender to the old soldiers who saved the country a parting benediction. That a surplus existed 1 ■was an evidence of national prosperity. That it had been gathered into the treasury without oppression or complaint was an evidence thatthe protective system was a just one. Mr. Dockery, of Missouri, said he would waive his objections to the protective system if the Re-' publicans could show that it benefited the laboring men of the country. But they could not do so. 0n the contrary, many unprotected industries paid their employes higuer wages than Were paid to laborers in protected establishments. He had statistics to show the immense bonus which the protective tariff put into the pockets of the manufacturers, but which did not go into the pockets of the workingmen. The Senate passed the House bill giving to the city of Grand Forks, D. T., the right to build twofree bridges across the Red River of the North. The conference report on the joint resolution for a conference of American nations was rejected by the Senate and a new conference ordered. When the Senate resumed consideration of tho railroad land forfeiture bill April 26, Mr. Palmer took the floor and argued against all the amendments as to the lands<ranted to the State of Michigan for railroad purposes and by the Governor of that State deeded to the Lako Superior Ship Canal Company. He declared that every process under the original grant had been known to the canal company as irregular, and that the company only hoped that time would cure its title and that continuance in possession would give to it rights which it> could not claim under the Jaw. Mr. Palmer scored the Lake Superior Ship Canal Company, and showed up the schemes to dispossess settlers of their claims. The Senate passed a bill granting.a right of way 100 feet in width to the Kansas City and Pacific Railroad through the Indian Territory (the company to pay sls » mile per annum for use of the nation or tribe of Indians whose land is taken), and appropriating SIOO,-000 additional for the completion of a public building at Wichita Kas. The tariff debate was continued in the House, Mr. : Buchanan, of New Jersey, being the firstspeaker. He opposed the bill as being a directs blow at all the industries in his district, and predicted thuX it would increase the surplus by stimulating importation. Mr. Hudd, of Wisconsin, said that the Democratic party had placed its shoulders against the car of tariff reform, and would propel it to the end of thejourney. He denied that the bloated system of protection had indeed protected Americanlabor. There had been strikes innumerable/ resulting in the last two years in a loss of $20,000,000. Remarks in favor of the bill weremade by Mr. Hemphill, of South Carolina, and in opposition by Mr. Osborne, of Pennsylvania.

Beyond the passing or seventeen pension, bills, the House did nothing but talk on the tariff, at its session on April 27. Mr. Brewer of Michigan opened the debate. He advocated; the protective system as one which tended to increase the wages of labor, and in support of his proposition he cited various statistics prepared by Commissioner Wright to show that, the rates of wages in this country largely exceeded those of the workingmen of England. He was especially earnest in his opposition to the free-wool clause, which he said would ruin, an industry which was national in its importance. It was true that there was danger in a large surplus, but not so great a danger as the President seemed to suppose. The Republican party had disposed of its surplus by paying off Government bonds, while the Democratic party hoarded its surplus in the treasury. Mr. Ford, of Michigan, said that the question presented now vujKone of tariff reduction, not abolition. HexSdiculed the position taken by the protectionists that a high tariff increased the wages of American workmen. No industries, he said, showed more poverty, more destitution, and more strike's among their workingmen than those so-cal ed protected ones. Referring to the claim that the home market was the best market, Mr. Ford said the result of this home-market swindle is that the farmer is most beautifully deluded. The high-tariff party gets his vote, the high trusts and monopolists get his money, and the farmer gets the hob. end of the poker. Mr. Goff, of Weit Virginia, said that he did not believe in free raw material. There was no such thing as raw material in the sense in which it was used in this discussion. Coal unmined was raw material, but when it was mined it was the miners’ finished product, and entitled to protection. It was as much entitled to protection as the rice fields of the South. Wool clipped from the sheep was not a raw material. It was the farmers’ finished labor. In conclusion he said protection had made “the flag of the country typify all that was great in human action, all that, was grand in human thought, and God only knew what it would do for our land if the Democratic party would let it alone.” Mr. ’ Landes, of Illinois, submitted an argument in support of the bill. While heartily advocating the bill, be regretted that it touched the whisky and tobacco taxes, which, instead of being reduced, should be increased. He hoped that the bill would pass, and that every member who voted against it for the purpose of continuing the granting of enormous bounties to manufacturers would meet with political death and would be buried under the ballot in November next below the resurrection line.

Women who meddle with everybody else’s business are to be shunned and feared. One of them was on the Troy local the other afternoon. A'spnicely dressed young man held in his hand a yellow paper covered book, in which he seemed to be deeply interested. The woman sat in front of him, and, happening to turn to taka in the passengers, observed tbe cheap literature which was engrossing the attention of the man behind her. Jn a pleading, insinuating voice she said to him: “Young man, don’t you know that you are wasting your time very foolishly in reading dime novels? You might better take a book on history with you or something else that would benefit your mind and give you an opportunity to improve.” Reaching her hand over the back of the seat, she said very deliberately: “Let me look at that book.” The young man, without relaxing a single feature, handed the book over to his aggressive fellow passenger. She turned it over to read the title. It was as follows: “Easy Lessons in French for Beginners.” The old lady never said a word. She dropped the book into the young man’s lap and shot into the next car.— Albany Journal,